You Make the Call: Video Clip

[Artisan]

Originally posted by sabreur
This thread shows that, despite the frequently expressed thought that "if we could just see the action, we would agree and quit talking at cross purposes" is probably not true.
MR

...and proves the point that even video and slow motion playback is no substitute for a good HUMAN referee.

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by sabreur
You yourself argued at great length that forward movement doesn't necessarily constitute the attack.

But what I saw was:

1. The fencer on the right starts forward without extension--his arm is cocked and his tip is pointing at the ceiling, and there is none of the sense of threat that you get when a flick is armed.
2. The fencer on the left starts forward without extension.
3. The fencer on the left starts his extension first (I think that what you read as a lowering of the blade, I read as the beginning of the extension).
4. The fencer on the right then begins his extension.

Touch left.

Also, as I noted, I think the perspective is deceptive, and probably causes the extension by the fencer on the left to look less pronounced than what it was. This thread shows that, despite the frequently expressed thought that "if we could just see the action, we would agree and quit talking at cross purposes" is probably not true.

MR

Oh i agree....forward motion itself does not constitute a touch.
And really, the perspective actions are seperated by something like a 20th of a second. I don't believe that i could make this call.

[edew]

I should add to my point about the simultaneous touches. In this particular instance, it would not be correct to call simultaneous.

In general, depending on other circumstances, calling simultaneous is perfectly acceptable. But in the instance shown in the clip, given the actions both took and the movement just prior to the final action, the referee really should make a call one way or another.

Frankly, even the fencers won't object if called either way. They would think less of the referee if called simultaneous. But not so if the referee called it "I don't know." (However, they would be less inclined to utilize such a referee in the future.)

[DanInMI]

Originally posted by edew
But not so if the referee called it "I don't know." (However, they would be less inclined to utilize such a referee in the future.)

I have to agree, I have respect for a referree that can say , "I don't know." That is much better than the one that flips a coin (figuratively) and makes the call.

[rvergara]

i'm not a referee, but what i see in the clip is that the guy on the left had a point in line and withdrew it, so i dont think it is about who had ROW but more about who lost ROW

[fencingguy]

Understand this is the opinion of an epee fencer. But, one who referees foil.

Based on what I could see in the video clip I would call that touch simultaneous. Knowing Charlie, and that he is a good ref, albeit one who has choked in tight situations in the past, I don't automatically assume that his call is correct. I also know Non, and how he fences (his name is Nontapat Panchan btw, not Panchan Nontapat) as does Charlie. Based on the flow of the touch prior to the final action I have to disagree with Eric, Non is bouncing in and out, not slowly moving forward, and Gutkovskiy has a point in line out. He appears to break the line as Non bounces backwards, and then they both move forward with an advance lunge, with extensions at the same time. I can understand a call for touch right, but based on the angle, not one for the left. Non's reaction did not look too upset though, so I'm guessing he probably agreed with the call to some degree. Point is, bad angle too hard to make the right call

And to whoever said "Easy touch" what are you talking about? There is no way that's an easy touch to call from that video no matter what level of referee you are.

[Dan H]

And to whoever said "Easy touch" what are you talking about? There is no way that's an easy touch to call from that video no matter what level of referee you are.

It is a clear touch to me. There's no blade contact to worry about. I'm not claiming the timing isn't close - merely that the timing is clear (Nontapat advances without attacking, and Gutkovskiy extends into this preparation a hair before Non decides to commence his attack). I should add a caveat, though - the lead-in to the clip clearly states, before we ever get to see the action, that the touch was awarded to the fencer on the left. Thus, we all knew before seeing it for the first time that it was a touch for the left. It's a lot easier to justify something you know is right than to come up with the answer on your own. I believe I would have made the touch left call immediately even without the extra information, but there's no way any of us could be sure about that.

[mollusk]

When I viewed this at normal speed it clearly looked like touch left, but when viewed frame by frame it was much more difficult to make the call. I think that is due to the fact that extending requires motion and you don't see that in still frames. It is the difference between frames that carries the essential information.

[Mihail]

Hey, guys.

I find it weird that very few people have said

attack from the right
counter-attack from the left
touch right

I understand that it's a close call, but I thought the above analysis should be a little more popular. After all, the fencer on the left has his point in line and as he retreats and removes the point, the fencer on the right starts his attack. The fencer on the left then starts the counter-attack which doesn't have the RoW.

If I am making a mistake, I would appreciate someone pointing it out. Thanks!

[RebelFencer]

Eek, tough call. After watching a few times it looked like right started the attack, very briefly pulled his arm back and re-extended as left attacked. I think I would either call that simulatneous or Attack left, counterattack right.